Yeah and ownership covers it. Except when Jeremy Jacobs is the owner.
Blah, blah, blah. 1967'.. Lazy argument. Jacobs and the Bruins are the bad guys here. Live with it.
Actually no they don't. If Jacobs paid the tax on the rings it counts as a gift under the law then the people receiving the rings get taxed on the gift
Remember Bettman said there were owners that were upset at how much the NHL was giving up. Owners that were not even there negotiating with players....
You gotta think these guys who are obviously more hardline than Jacobs and are not working anywhere near as hard as Jacobs on getting a deal done are far more harmful to the process.
Actually no they don't. If Jacobs paid the tax on the rings it counts as a gift under the law then the people receiving the rings get taxed on the gift
No. Gifts are taxed on the giver, not the receiver, though there's a $13,000 exemption per year, per receiver. It's to prevent people from trying to get around the inheritance (death) tax by gifting away the majority of their estate before they die.
No. Gifts are taxed on the giver, not the receiver, though there's a $13,000 exemption per year, per receiver. It's to prevent people from trying to get around the inheritance (death) tax by gifting away the majority of their estate before they die.
Not in Mass. One of the posters who deals with this stuff laid it out for everyone. Let me see if I can find it.
BTW, for Bruins fans to claim I'm "Biased" and a troll for pointing out how cheap Jacobs is, have you seen my comments on former Leafs owner Harold Ballard? Your argument is toast.
Ballard was cheaper and a worse human being than Jacobs and I rip into him every chance I get.
Is there a worse owner in this CBA mess than Jacobs? This guy is such an unbelievable cheapskate. He is a big reason there is no hockey right now.
Spending hand over fist, giving long-term deal and no-movements does what exactly, beside ensuring that said players become complacent and only put in half-efforts?
For someone cheap, he's let Chiarelli assemble a winning core with a potential future Hockey Hall of Fame goaltender (Thomas) and defenseman (Chara), turned a perceived downard asset (Kessel, who has worked out great for you guys by the way) into a bounty and so on.
The Bruins haven't missed playoffs since when, a bit iin the 80s/90s?
I WISH my owner was that cheap and that awful.
Jacobs is allowed to keep his house as he sees fit; he's allowed to dislike escalating salaries and he's allowed to steer his ship and offer his opinion on the league.
BTW, for Bruins fans to claim I'm "Biased" and a troll for pointing out how cheap Jacobs is, have you seen my comments on former Leafs owner Harold Ballard? Your argument is toast.
Ballard was cheaper and a worse human being than Jacobs and I rip into him every chance I get.
Yes, because everyone knows Hitler was evil. I guess that just proves everyone who believes that sentiment is a peace loving, objective sprite.
BTW, for Bruins fans to claim I'm "Biased" and a troll for pointing out how cheap Jacobs is, have you seen my comments on former Leafs owner Harold Ballard? Your argument is toast.
Considering you constantly mention that the Bruins were too cheap to resign Kessel. Yes, yes you are biased.
But, I hate that Jacobs is leading this lockout, he is one of the last guys who should complain about the present. Locking out the players was bound to happen with Fehr on the other end, but Jacobs owns a team doing great financially who also just happened to resign all its players.
BTW, for Bruins fans to claim I'm "Biased" and a troll for pointing out how cheap Jacobs is, have you seen my comments on former Leafs owner Harold Ballard? Your argument is toast.
Ballard was cheaper and a worse human being than Jacobs and I rip into him every chance I get.
Nothing says cheap like spending up to and over the cap buying out players like Murry, Schaefer etc
Considering you constantly mention that the Bruins were too cheap to resign Kessel. Yes, yes you are biased.
But, I hate that Jacobs is leading this lockout, he is one of the last guys who should complain about the present. Locking out the players was bound to happen with Fehr on the other end, but Jacobs owns a team doing great financially who also just happened to resign all its players.
I've never really said that. I have stated they wanted to make a "Marc Savard Cap" for forwards like they did with Ray Bourque and Kessel was being lowballed.
I have no idea re the payment plans. Gift tax is not actually my thing (corporate tax is), I just happened to be working on a very similar issue today when this story reared its head.
What I failed to realize initially is that gifts made to employees are in fact includible in the employees' gross income for income tax purposes, as an employer is deemed to not give gifts out of "detached and disinterested generosity." So now the whole story makes sense.
Without taking the preceding into account, it wouldn't make sense that employees would have footed any tax bill if the rings were gifted, as it would have fallen on Jacobs to pay the gift tax. However, this clearly falls under the rule above from IRC Section 102(c) and thus the employees do in fact have taxable income equal to the value of the rings.
However, that the employees were forced to foot the tax bill is not a function of Jacobs being a miserable *******, but of U.S. federal tax law. So, in sum, don't jump on Jacobs for this one. Your ire is misplaced.
Brian Lawton @brianlawton9
Shocking Update #CBA meetings. The owner said to have been the most helpful to players in the meetings. Not who most have assumed! (cont.)
Yes Ron Burkle has been a voice of reason but the answer is and most people won't believe it but it is true.......JEREMY JACOBS
